Advertisement

Super school to be super-analysed

By 5 September 2005 10

News today that three citizen groups are going to do their own cost-benefit analyses of the super school planned for Ginninderra.

Katy Gallagher says the community feedback regarding the school is now “more positive than negative” — damning by faint praise? However she also says that if the community wants her to abandon the idea, she will.

She does make the interesting point that if the government gives up on this super school idea, that in a few years’ time people will be turning round and wanting to know why the area’s education is underfunded and underresourced — because of there being few kids in the schools in the area (it does seem to be something of a catch-22 situtation).

Interestingly, I know a few people who go to Ginninderra High and they have all either moved or started making arrangements to move schools because of being messed around and not knowing what’s going to happen to Ginninderra High in the future.

Please login to post your comments
10 Responses to Super school to be super-analysed
#1
Thumper8:10 am, 06 Sep 05

Its all very simple. Gallagher has announced, with no consultation, that it will close. The community, upon hearing this, will take no chances and will enrol their kids elsewhere.

Gallagher knows this, so comes out and says that she will listen to the community and won’t close it if that’s what they say and want.

However, next year enrolments will now be so low that there will now only be one option, and that will be to close the school. And consultation at this stage will prove the decision correct.

Government gets their way, the people get walked over once again.

The writing is on the wall.

#2
Maelinar9:56 am, 07 Sep 05

Hear Hear Thumper

Perhaps they could take a leaf from their own book and initiate an 8 year planning cycle ? Then there would be plenty of time to discuss and plan and fart around and scratch asses etc etc.

During that time, you’d also be able to see the fluctuation in school numbers, and be able to make an informed decision on the matter.

#3
areaman1:20 pm, 07 Sep 05

Except that they were going to have max 150 students next year even before the closing announcement, and that’s just not enough for a 7-10 school.

#4
Thumper1:23 pm, 07 Sep 05

You didn’t read my post did you.

#5
Maelinar2:03 pm, 07 Sep 05

I think more research has been done into the effect of the school on the area concerned on this website than in Ms Gallagher’s office, so I’m not holding my breath.

Areaman, what’s wrong with an 8 year planning cycle ? too hard ? too expensive ? too long ?

Beats a poorly made snap decision any day my old adversary, and if they had the alleged forethought that they are meant to be using to make their esteemed decisions on, it wouldn’t be too hard to find the associated documentation would it ?

It would actually be welcomed if 8 years ago they said they were looking into the closure, had done the studies, found out that it was improperly placed, identified a solution, tested that, and were implementing it to make a savings that was backed up by documentation and hard facts, and for the good of the community. But they haven’t have they ?

They have applied the logic and forethought of a couple of MLA’s getting together with a bottle of red wine thinking up ways of saving money to spend on unnecessary lawsuits and irrelevant statues.

That really has been the essence of my argument throughout these and related threads on school closures, and I still haven’t heard anything to the contrary.

#6
areaman3:00 pm, 07 Sep 05

Thumper, yes I did what I’m saying is that there were only going to be 150 students BEFORE any announcement of closure was made, so there would be even less now people have started moving out but it wasn’t tenable at any point.

#7
Thumper3:05 pm, 07 Sep 05

And I fear that they haven’t taken into account the changing demographics of the area.

Holt primary opened in about 1974 or so. In those days only half of Holt was actually built. The demographic was young families.

Thirty years on and those young families no longer have kids at home and the parents have either retired, or are very close to retiring.

And given the canberra trend of retiring, selling up and moving to a smaller place, or the coast, the demographic will change again over the next 5-10 years as houses come on the market for a reasonably cheap rate thus allowing for young families, complete with young kiddies, to buy into the area.

In fact, they’ll probably be able to buy medium density places on the old Holt and Higgins school and oval sites because they would have been sold off to developers by then.

#8
areaman3:56 pm, 07 Sep 05

I’d say they would have taken trends into account which is why they want to build a $43m school to replace it rather than just close it down (which is what the current enrollments would seem to suggest is the best way forward).

#9
Thumper4:22 pm, 07 Sep 05

ope,

I could not be bothered getting into this discussion once again. read my comments, at least they make more sense than your simplistic, “because they know best” statement.

#10
Maelinar8:52 am, 08 Sep 05

Where are these trends you speak of areaman ?

Where is the justification to spend $43m on a school in real and practical terms, on paper for all to see ?

What is the projected enrollments for the next 10 years in that area ?

Put some substance into your words and I might start listening to them.

At the moment, all you’re doing is blowing the same hot air as the idiots who came up with this cockamai idea in the first place.

It’s this simple; If this data exists, show me it. Better still, show the people who live in the area concerned in a pamphlet or booklet. Now I’m aware that you probably don’t work anywhere near the area responsible for producing this material, but I think you get the hint. I want what you’re saying substantiated.

Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.